From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add LAPACKE Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 14:22:12 +0200 Message-ID: <878tx5iv7v.fsf@mdc-berlin.de> References: <20160708154008.24871-1-ricardo.wurmus@mdc-berlin.de> <87k2gqhogo.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35383) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bNJBN-0001Yh-5c for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 08:22:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bNJBI-0005ZE-TL for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 08:22:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87k2gqhogo.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > Hi! > > Ricardo Wurmus skribis: > >> here's an alternative to the patch provided here: >> >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-06/msg00099.htm= l >> >> Instead of building LAPACKE as part of the lapack package this patch a= dds a >> new package "lapack-with-lapacke". I did this because an increase in = closure >> size of 20MiB is a little much for a commonly used package, in my opin= ion. > > The 20MiB increase shown in the message above correspond mostly to > gcc:lib, which is present anyway, so I would say it=E2=80=99s acceptabl= e. Well, in this case I=E2=80=99ll just apply Dave=E2=80=99s patch then (see= email in the ML archive). =E2=80=9Cguix refresh -l lapack=E2=80=9D shows me that 51 packages are af= fected, which results in a rebuild of 86 dependent packages. Okay to push to master? ~~ Ricardo